Ask Gen90s
Ask Gen90s is a series of topics started up in July 2012 to ask the 90ites what their thoughts on certain issues or topics are. This also uses the new Poll feature that was added to the forums a few days before. The topics were started by Emanresu. Examples Piracy Piracy Downloading digital media for free has always been an issue since the advent of the internet. Corporations, companies, and artists claim that piracy has strangled their products to a standstill and that increasing levels of piracy result in them being less able and/or willing to produce quality products at an acceptable price. It becomes difficult to want to create new and exciting media knowing that many people will enjoy your product that you toiled on for free. DRM and artificial inflation of digital products that cost little to produce and distribute compared to their physical counterparts have been some of the results of their efforts to stave away piracy. Whether or not these measures are effective remains a question that may never be provable. Pirates claim that the overpriced and large amounts of low-quality products being offered to them are unreasonable and that piracy allows them to experience materials that they would have otherwise not been able to purchase and use. Many pirates see piracy as a way for them to "demo" products and later purchase them if they find that they enjoyed them enough. Other pirates have problems with middlemen like producers and corporations receiving a large chunk of the profits, while the real workers like artists and developers seeing little of the money when a product is bought, so they tend to try to support the real workers in other ways like buying concert tickets or purchasing mostly indie games. Regardless, piracy does represent in some lost potential revenue, which is what those who create the products see as the main detriment. Pirates often see it more as being able to pick and choose more strategically what they want to spend their money on in a world with many more options for media than before. Poll Results Perfectly acceptable practice - 16 Should be discouraged - 11 Drugs Drugs Here, the definition of drugs that is used is any substance that can create an addiction and produce a change in consciousness. This includes, but is not limited to: caffeine, alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, hallucinogens, heroin, cocaine, and more. How drugs should be regulated by governments is the main issue. Drug usage can lead to individuals committing other crimes, which is the main and most direct concern. Of secondary concern is the effect that drugs can have on a person, both biologically and psychologically. It is for this reason that governments restrict other chemicals such as lead. Some drugs that aren't quite as harmful and are more difficult to kill a person are legal already like caffeine, alcohol, and tobacco. Revenue can be generated by taxing these legal drugs and controlling their distribution. Regardless of the legality, somewhere a line is drawn between those drugs that are legal and those that are not. Often times where that line should be drawn is the point of contention. Criteria based on direct mind-altering effects, short-term and long-term health, expense, and possibility of violence and deaths are the main points to be considered. The other side of the drug regulation front tends to present a more idealistic view. Drugs only directly affect the person using them and secondary effects have an element of choice involved, leaving the person ultimately responsible. After all, it was both their decision to take the drug(s) while sober and then to act after becoming intoxicated. This is already seen in drugs that are already legal, like alcohol, so why shouldn't other drugs be legal as well and suffer the same kind of scrutiny? The issue of an intrusive government that aims at restricting what you can do with your body is a secondary concern as well. A compromising viewpoint is often taken between the two extremes. Have a more open discussion on the previously mentioned line between which drugs are dangerous enough that they should undoubtedly be outlawed and those that aren't quite as harmful and should be made legal so as to introduce an element of government standards and regulations to reduce harmful misuse. Taxes and prices could even scale accordingly based on which drugs are seen to be the most harmful, so as to discourage their usage. Poll Results Crime - 8 Legal - 17 Capital Punishment Capital Punishment The concept of sentencing someone to death in the near future because of (usually) some gross violation of the law or laws is what we're questioning. Otherwise it would be assumed that the criminal would be sentence to imprisonment, likely for life. A larger issue to address would be how penal systems should ran. Supporters of the death penalty argue that the possibility of death for a deadly crime acts a deterrent. On a more pragmatic point, housing a criminal in a prison for the rest of his or her life tends to cost more than killing them. Sometimes, it is said that for some heinous crimes (rape-murders, genocide, killing sprees, etc) death is the only sentence worthy for the person on a moral perspective. There is also the fear that these criminals may escape if imprisoned and disappear into the world, continuing their crimes. Opponents of the death penalty tend to believe that no person, even acting on behalf of the state, should be responsible for another person's life. Death is one thing that cannot be undone and represents a permanence not seen in other punishments. Similarly, the question of whether justice should focus on punishment or reformation arises. If it is the latter, then capital punishment is incompatible with the law's aims. Many argue that the people who commit these crimes that currently warrant death are fully aware of the consequences yet continue with their actions, limiting its effectiveness as a deterrent. Poll Results Yes - 15 No - 10 Homosexuality Homosexuality Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer, asexual, and all other approaches to sexuality are included here, so long as it's not the classical man-woman relationship. I use the word homosexuality in the topic title as it covers the majority of sexual preferences without requiring me to make some long and wordy title instead. This is less of how the government should regulate things like marriage and more along the lines of how do you believe the common populace should treat people who don't follow the standard sexual preferences. Supporters of homosexuality often cite the issue as a natural progression in the series of civil rights that people have fought for in the last century. Rights for all races, rights for women, and now rights for gays. By itself, homosexuality doesn't create any direct problems and accepting it in society leads toward more acceptance of people of all sorts and allows more avenues for happiness and freedom. Evidence of gay relationships have been around almost as long as humans could record history, so it isn't a new concept. Disallowing and/or discouraging homosexuality can cause great stress to those who know themselves to be homosexual as they feel like it's something that's born into them and you can't change it. Opponents of homosexuality tend to cite the sanctity of traditional relationships as something at stake if homosexuality is embraced. Worries arise especially if the couple were to have children but lack a male or female parent and experience too much of one sex. A large portion of opposition to homosexuality tends to stem from religious roots, where some religious stipulate that a man and woman is the only acceptable coupling. Religion is inevitably part of society so it should always be factored in; the question is to what extent. The main secular opposition stems from believing that homosexuality is the choice of the individual and is something that can be controlled through force of will. With that concern, some worry that if homosexuality is something that one can be converted to, then it could potentially lead to a large portion of the population to stop producing children. Poll Results Perfectly normal - 26 Should be discouraged - 4 Space Exploration Space Exploration With the recent death of Neil Armstrong and the Curiosity on Mars, space has been in the spotlight once again. A few countries have been starting up space programs with the intent of returning to the Moon and more. The question of whether everyone should be pushing space exploration as a major issue arises, for a variety of reasons. Supporters of space exploration cite the net indirect benefit going to space has brought to the modern world. Satellites enable expansive cell phone service and smart phone technology across the world, imaging techniques have contributed to diagnosis of illnesses, and more. Admittedly, the direct and obvious benefits of sending people and equipment into space are a bit harder to see, but technological advances that have come from space programs are abundant. Looking into the more long-term, it becomes more and more evident that humanity is going to need to expand outside of the Earth at some point, and beginning sooner than later is the name of the game. Opponents of space exploration tend to claim that there are more important issues that need time and money right now. Few people hold the opinion that space is a complete waste of time that will never be useful, but many who oppose space exploration merely rank it lower in priority than issues like the economy, social programs, and such. In addition, space advancements tend to produce benefits that come a bit later, leaving the short-term behind. In this case, it's indicative of a larger issue if you think that the current state of affairs are ripe for a focus on science and space exploration. Poll Results Yes, more space exploration now - No, we have bigger issues now - Category:Topics